This is all good for Russian oil and gas prices, they already got their money back on the financial 'aide' to Syria. Smart move by Russia to protect their export prices.

Just like your average Russian city, Syria and Iran need also to be emptied of all their talented people and women, who usually marry out to the West for better lives (encouraged by mum and dad). So the upside is the West gains some talent.... for a few boxes of grenades and bazookas.

I can't see the issue with this war. Some crazy people kill each other, Psychopathic regimes getting bled dry all the hate in the world centralised into one expendable area.

Russia and USA are win win with this war. Russia protect energy revenues, the USA get to go to meetings which is much cheaper than assisting.

And as for Hezbollah and Iran, oh dear what have they got themselves into. Headline Hezbollah and Iran "We need more troops....... repeat...... repeat...... repeat.....etc".

Russia and Iran, keep up the good work. USA, just keep licking the stamps on those crates of weapons. Israel "Mazel tov" guys its going your way.

Let's be realistic, sooner or later secular dictators like Mubarak are going to fall. Its easy to talk about Islamic Spring and such BS, what should the West do, prop up Mubarak, then his son, and his grandson?

As for Assad, let's be honest, its not the US that is delusional, but Iran and Russia. You know the situation is not sustainable, when the Iran has to send men to do Assad's fighting. The level of aid the West and their Arab allies has committed is peanuts compared to what the Iranians/Russians have been pumping. Regimes were a minority group ruling over a majority is not sustainable in the long run. Even if Assad wins this time, what is going to happen in 20 years, again another sh*t storm. During Manchu rule in China in the 18-19th century, there were a total of 3-4 anti-Manchu rebellions each costing 5-30 Million lives over a 100 year period.

Syria has became a sectarian conflict, and to be frank, the West and her Sunni allies does not have to commit any troops. I don't think they will. However, Iran is doing it right now, and is planning to send even more troops. Basically, the US and her Sunni Arab allies are just going to bleed Iran and Assad to the negotiating table. With Western sanctions, how long can the Iranian economy hold up?

People don't look at the political / diplomatic cost incurred by Iran. Iran approval ratings in the Arab world has dropped from 70 to 15%, in the last 7 years.

"Syria has became a sectarian conflict, and to be frank, the West and her Sunni allies does not have to commit any troops."

The "democratic" despots in Bahrain (a country which murdered its the opposition) and the Saudi Arabia - all allies of the warmongering US has beens already send their jihadist troops to Syria to show the World how to commit cannibalism by devouring the hearts of their victims.

Iran has high approval ratings by countries that matter- COMMUNIST China (the bankers of the broke and sinking US), Russia, Pakistan, Afghanistan and India, what means more than half of the World population.

And the actual reason why the massacre in Syria persists is insufficient supply of high tech weaponry to the legal Syria government of president Assad.

Now that the western losers realize that the jihadists they train and arm are being humiliated by the Syrian army, they would like to legalize supply the murderous terrorist scum with more advanced weaponry, what of course will untie the hands of the Syria friends and President Assad will receive all kind of Chinese, Russian and Iranian military support.

The very mention of Russia supplying Syria with oldie but goodie S300-PMU SAM made the US whine, because the US remembers well enough the onslaught of the USAF in Vietnam by USSR-made SAM and AAA, which destroyed 1,737 fixed wing USAF aircraft.

Perhaps Russia should supply Syria also with some super duper Iskander-E supersonic missile complexes to mop up the jihadist gang formations in Alepo and will provide President Assad with detailed satellite info of the western losers military congregation in neighboring countries and Israel so Syria can avoid "element of surprise" by the western losers and their ME satraps, while Russia and Chine keep the western colonialists at short leash in the UNSC.

Is your beloved China will to dump US bonds right now just for Syria? Go ahead, write a letter to PBOC telling them to stop buying US bonds, since you are so sure. Does Iran have high opinion polls in the China, Pakistan. Afghanistan? Please show me the polls.

Is it legal? Who elected him? Assad maybe has another 30-35 years, Who's next? His son?

That was Vietnam, what about now? Israel has launched raids in to Damascus. How many Israeli planes were shot down. As for S300PMU, are the Russians going to put Russians to man those units or just handed it over to the Syrians? To be effective immediately, Russians will have to man them. This is exactly what the West wants, to put Russians and Iranians on the ground.

The ugly fact is the West and her allies do not have to commit a lot of money to the fight.

"To your humble blogger, this is simply the next iteration of the unspoken, brutally realpolitik policy towards Syria that's been going on for the past two years. To recap, the goal of that policy is to ensnare Iran and Hezbollah into a protracted, resource-draining civil war, with as minimal costs as possible. This is exactly what the last two years have accomplished.... at an appalling toll in lives lost. "

It might not have started out that way, but in the last year that is what the US has been doing. Their real aim is Iran, not Syria. Its to bleed Iran, impoverish Iran. When the US decides to do asymmetric warfare, it can go on for ever.

Of course you might not like it, but its most likely going to work. The US does not have to spend much, the rebels have the numbers behind them.

"To be effective immediately, Russians will have to man them. This is exactly what the West wants, to put Russians and Iranians on the ground."

LOL, Russia is training Syrian operators to use the super duper S-300 PMU2 since the contract was signed. The real reason for not shipping them is to avoid leakage of encryption keys to the wrong parties BEFORE this awesome weapons actually are used.

What Russia needs to do is to supply Syria with the unsurpassed anti-SAM anti-any-command-structure hypersonic guided missile complex Iskander-M to suppress the western colonialist invasion from their Jordan satraps territory. Annihilating US SAM/ABM is what Iskander is designed to do and Russia will be very happy to test the efficiency of this awesome weapon in real life. Russia already did a big arsewooping of the US armed and trained gruzin genocidal maniacs in S Ossetia where the Iskander demonstrated its incredible potency.

Perhaps lower grade Iskander-E will do a god job demolishing areas of jihadist gang formations in Alepo by using thermobaric warheads. Russia must not be shy supplying the legal government of Syria with means to protect itself against murderous scum armed and trained by western terrorists for sure.

Raelly??? Where is the proof? You have none. We don't even know if the West and here Sunni allies even plan to setup a no-fly zone. If every thing was GO, why didn't they use them against Israeli fighters? If Russia was serious, those SAMs would have been in Syria YESTERDAY !!!!

You have to understand, Syria, particularly the present form of an Alawite minority ruling a Sunni majority is a legacy of French colonialism. So please spare me the silly debate about being anti-colonial blah blah. If it was not for the French, do you think Alawites would be in power today.

What the Iranians and Russians are doing is enforcing an artificial colonial legacy. Yes the West is colonial, but at least they are not hypocrites !!!

This comment has also been posted on this blog's latest blog as well, but it is just as relevant in this section as well:

I cannot help but feel compelled to comment on the strong stance that the Economist has taken, since the beginning of the conflict on calling for the west to arm the rebels, a proposition that cannot be substantiated by ANY logical and reasonable argument,

For any person, which cares about human life, dignity, the ability of human beings to live in a reasonably tolerant and relatively prosperous society to say that the best course of action is arming the rebels, is an insanity.

This has been clear from the very first protest in Syria that if you are a person which believes in the value of life and want to prevent human suffering and pain to millions you must support and rally behind the assertion that president Assad must maintain control, remain in power, pressuring him for incremental reforms while at the same time do everything in your power to time STOP arms falling in the hand of rebels.

Now, 90 000 deaths and countless of people displaced and in misery, a country in ruins, the rise of Islamism extremist, the true face of the rebels exposed (14 year old boy shot in the face in front of his parents because he said he does not believe in Islam) the Economist still has the audacity to ask its readers to support arming the rebels? ARE YOU INSANE? who's interest do you serve and what are your arguments?

Let me break it down discuss the legitimacy of the different sides: The rebels are legitimate to take up fight against Assad? Why? For countless reasons, be they: desire to be in power, dissatisfaction with his policies, historical events, religious differences, sectarian forces, etc. Assad is legitimate to fight those that take arms against his regime, why? Because he knows that the replacement would unleash devastating reprecusions on his Alawyte sect, the ruling class and all of its supporters, to all religious minorities and against the Shia minority.

Saudi Arabia, Qatar and other Sunni factions feel compelled to support the rebels on religious grounds, whether you find this legitimate or not is a matter of opinion, but it is understandable.

Even the united states stake, which I assume came from the request of his (only) regional allies (see above) is understandable, an ally asks for your support, you do your best to give it, perhaps you would need something in return on a different occasion.

Even Europe would feel compelled to side with the US, since they should be the closest thing to being allies in terms of foreign policy.

But what in the world, gives media (the Economist), which is supposed to be objective, independent, and provide readers with a fair analysis of facts, present arguments that allow them to make substantiated decision by themselves the right to take such a blatantly horribly wrong position? You have no arguments for asking your readers to think that arming the rebels is a good idea, there is NOTHING you can say that makes that the right course of action, yet you do it nevertheless.

It is horrible to watch, and I’ve seen it unfold over two years with no end in sight!

The blood of 90 000 people and the horrible fate of so many others is on the hands of those who decided it was a good idea to provide arms to rebels! I have no doubt about that. If you want to pursue foreign policy, tell us why we think that making this sacrifice is worth it, or don’t say anything at all!

"On June 13th the White House announced it would give “military aid” to Syrian rebels for the first time in their 27-month battle against President Bashar Assad. American officials did not specify what exactly that would entail, but sources told the Associated Press and the New York Times it would include light arms and CIA training on how to use them—and possibly anti-tank but not anti-aircraft missiles."

US who?

LOL :D

The US can not fart without COMMUNIST Chia permission, because COMMUNIST China keeps the BROKE & SINKING US by the ball, being the US banker. And the supper powers COMMUNIST China and Russia already stomped the western imperialists and colonialists into the ground in the UNSC.

Communist China holds an IOU … that's all … what it means is … China could get stiffed! How are you gonna collect? Let me know … wise guy! As for Russia … they've already blown their load! Resource rich … but NOTHING ELSE GOING FOR IT … unless YOU like the weather!

The 2 Communist States are far from being 'dominant' in anything going forward. China will be experiencing its own 'Awakening' sooner or later … the repression there will astonish the world as well … it won't be pretty … and China may not make it as a whole nation either … they have been prone to 'War Lords' in the past … it may be part of their FUTURE as well …

BUT the USA will be the Energizer Bunny compared to those states … it'll keep on ticking with its military might in tact … doesn't matter how many medals the Ruskies or Chinese Commies wear on their chests!

If COMMUNIST China quits to buy US DEBT, the US will nosedive into depression in no time. The US treasury notes are junk anyways but if COMMUNIST China decides to float the market, the US economy will collapse, the US will split in six and Texas will become Mexas, heh, heh, heh :D

Hillary Clinton revealed America's deep anxiety over China's growing economic power and hold on US finances by asking Australia's then prime minister: "How do you deal toughly with your banker?"

The question, at a lunch with Kevin Rudd last March and reported in a US Department of State cable, underscores the evolving and often difficult relationship between the world's superpower and an increasingly mighty China. It is the largest holder of US treasury bonds, with around $870bn.

The fact is the Russian S300's aren't even delivered YET … they need to be paid for IN FULL … and then the Ruskies will deliver them … but there MUST BE a 'fix' for taking them out … something the Israelis or the Americans can devise … its not like it hasn't been done before with the other SAM Missile batteries …

I'd always bet on the Americans over the Ruskies … their best minds have left the country !!

The fact that the US and their zionazi masters whine like biatches about the ancient S-300 (which circa 80's last century is much better system than the Patriot crapola) is indicative enough about the small anglo-texan brains.

What the heck, USSR circa 60's last century SAM in Yugoslavia kept the NATzO morons fly above the 30000 feet ceiling of this ancient weaponry and the NATzO morons were not able to overcome the YU air defences EVER.

And for great laughs of the civilized humanity this ancient SAM shoot dow the US wana be "stealth" F117 and show the broke down US shitte to the World to laugh so the redfaced yankz were not able to deny their loss and bombed the Belgrade TV station in powerless rage to "stop the YU propaganda".

Oh … I get it … a 'Slav' bigot … a "never met a 'Slav' I didn't like" kinda guy? Is that it … tough guy?

The USA has more/better/faster shit than any Ruskie Parusky could ever dream of … the SAM Missile batteries have been around the Middle East since the 1970's and have yet to do 'damage' to the Israeli IDF … how come? Even when the Russians manned the batteries in Syria vs Israel in 1973 … they tore them down 'eventually' … and even in 1982 … the IDF destroyed 90 MIG's and 30 SAM batteries without the loss of ONE IDF aircraft … what are the odds? Look it up … Slavophile! Don't stay out in the sun … your white skin could be burnt with the coming global warming … keep your hat on over your skin head!

The 'thieving oligarchs'? Well … for starters … but what about the 1 MILLION JEWS that left Russia in the last 30 years … let alone the other 'nationalities' with 'brains' who decided to get out while they could …

It's rare that one would remain in Russia because they loved it! Sure there are a few … but MANY left for other shores … how about Brin from Google (Jewish but still brought his Cahones to the USA)

Would it have been better to remain in Russia … imprisoned FOR NOTHING … treated with contempt … like Khodorovsky? Nah … it's better to be FREE!

But … 'MOSCOW GIRLS MAKE ME SING AND SHOUT … AND GEORGIA'S ALWAYS ON MY MA-MA-MIND'

"The USA has more/better/faster shit than any Ruskie Parusky could ever dream of …"

Pff, HA HA HA, ignorant fool :D

Not only that the US are too dumb to design anything without hiring foreign brains, and poor NASA can't make a single Space flight without using the Russia-made RD180 main buster engine of ATLAS-5, but yankistani are crapping their pants about such superiour weapons like SUNBURN and YAHONT aircraft carrier killers, the anti-tank weapionry like KORNET made Bush the war criminal military gang whine just about the rummors the Iraq may had some, and the hypersonic ISCANDER-M capable to lobotomize any US anti-ballistic missile defense. LOL :D

But then again the humiliating for the NATzO failure to deal with the YU air defenses is proof that well trained personnel can screw any US-made junk even with archaic USSR-made SAM and laugh about it, heh, heh, heh :D

No wonder the US and teir zionazi masters shit their pants about Syria getting S-300, and the zionazi threatening to deal with the delivery BEFORE it is installed, because after instalation the US made junk zionazi use will be a sitting ducks :D

But then again the zionazi still scratch their kicked by hezbollah arse in lebanon, 40 merkava junk in flames. LOL :D

Ah and I forget to add, The USSR arms whooped the USAF arse big time in Vietnam, heh, heh, heh :D

There were significant aircraft losses during the Vietnam War. Thousands of U.S. fixed-wing aircraft were lost to ground fire of antiaircraft artillery (AAA), surface-to-air missiles (SAMs), and fighter interceptors (MiG)s. Among fixed-wing aircraft, more F-4 Phantoms were lost than any other type in service with any nation.

All told, the U.S. Air Force lost 2,251 aircraft: 1,737 to hostile action, and 514 in accidents. 110 of the losses were helicopters and the rest fixed-wing.

No wonder the US crap their pants about Russia selling S-300 to Syria : once burned twice shy, heh, heh, heh :D

Russia should sell also some TUNGUSKA anti-aircraft artilery, to keep the US drones falling from the sky in droves, heh, heh, heh :D

May be some super duper ISCANDER-M will come handy in obliterating the west armed and trained jihadist band formations in Alepo too.

And I know why the screwed gruzin tzatz whines - he still have a russian boot mark on his arse after several Russia military regiments humiliated the 30000 strong US-armed and trained gruzin army gang of genocidal maniac SuckASSvilli out of S Ossetia in laughable 3 days of fighting, and collected the crappy US-made weaponry from the ditches the gruzin cowards threw to run faster, heh, heh, heh :D

And the Gruzian turds did feel painfully the devastating effect of Iscander-M, the missile that is designed to lobotomize any kind of US-made command and control centers including the US anti-aircraft defences:

The Iskander ballistic missile is superior to its predecessor, the Oka. The Iskander-M system is equipped with two solid-propellant single-stage guided missiles, model 9M723K1. Each one is controlled throughout the entire flight path and fitted with a nonseparable warhead. Each missile in the launch carrier vehicle can be independently targeted in a matter of seconds. The mobility of the Iskander launch platform makes a launch difficult to prevent.

Targets can be located not only by satellite and aircraft but also by a conventional intelligence center, by a soldier who directs artillery fire or from aerial photos scanned into a computer. The missiles can be re-targeted during flight in the case of engaging mobile targets.[5] Another unique feature of Iskander-M (not Iskander-E) is the optically guided warhead, which can also be controlled by encrypted radio transmission, including such as those from AWACS or UAV. The electro-optical guidance system provides a self-homing capability. The missile's on-board computer receives images of the target, then locks onto the target with its sight and descends towards it at supersonic speed

In flight, the missile follows a quasi-ballistic path, performing evasive maneuvers in the terminal phase of flight and releasing decoys in order to penetrate missile defense systems. The missile never leaves the atmosphere as it follows a relatively flat trajectory.

The Russian Iskander-M cruises at hypersonic speed of 2100–2600 m/s (Mach 6–7) at a height of 50 km. The Iskander-M weighs 4615 kg, carries a warhead of 710–800 kg, has a range of 400–480 km, and achieves a CEP (Circular error probable) of 5–7 meters. During flight it can maneuver at different altitudes and trajectories and can pull up to 20 to 30 G to evade anti-ballistic missiles. For example, in one of the trajectory modes it can dive at the target at 90 degrees at the rate of 700–800 m/s performing anti-ABM maneuvers.[3][6]

Iskander has achieved accuracy, range and reliability (ability to penetrate defences) that constitutes an alternative approach to precision bombing for air forces that cannot expect to launch bombing or cruise missile fire missions reliably in the face of superior enemy fighters and air defenses. Training and competence requirements are much lower than for normal air force assets like a fighter bomber squadron utilizing guided bombs.

Deployment and combat history[edit]

According to the Moscow Centre for Strategy and Technology Analysis, the Iskander-M system was combat-tested in the 2008 South Ossetia war with Georgia and it proved highly effective in destroying military targets and infrastructure.[9] Quoting unconfirmed reports,[who?] Moscow Defense Brief says that it was an Iskander missile that inflicted a high precision strike on the Georgian Separate Tank Battalion base in Gori, destroying 28 tanks. Russian officials have admitted to using the Iskander missile against Georgia and official reports[who?] testify to the high effectiveness of the Iskander missiles, as one of the most devastating and accurate weapons in the Russian arsenal.[10] The Dutch government's investigation claims that a single, 5 mm fragment from an anti-personnel sub-munition, that was propelled by an Iskander missile, killed Dutch journalist Stan Storimans in Gori, which was home to various military targets

I think,this step of America can lead the game towards another end. The situation can be worse because President Bashar Al-Assad is being supported by many other countries. Where as the intentions of white house concerned over lethal weapons which are used by Syrian government, American are right for this. Syrian government should keep in mind the human values and they should not let it away from their hands.

The British, American and French officials that "concluded" Syrian government used chemical weapons will need to show the evidence to the whole world to judge.
Also, person/people being responsible for such conclusion needs to come up front and state it, I mean, they got nothing to hide with such "conclusive" evidence, no? Otherwise, are we going to take such "serious allegation" from an unconfirmed source that can't be held accountable? The hell not!
We missed a chance to roll some heads in Iraq. Lets not miss this 2nd chance offered to us for free ;)

We know accurately only when we know little, with knowledge, doubt increases" Goethe
I know very little, if anything, about
Siria. We believe ("the magical power of habbit") that we know things. We go online, and it is all ok. We learn about Siria´s GDP´s, population, gastronomic and culture traditions, and we believe, that that is that.
We tend to be creative: Siria Killer, and all that. But the thing is there is a lot to be learn, and should be all ears. Mouth shut, ears open.
«If a man will begin with certainties, he shall end in doubts; but if he will be content to begin with doubts he shall end in certainties.» Francis Bacon

The neo-Sultan has been shooting water cannon laced with non-medical chemicals at thousands of protestors in Taksin square. Now The EU and Nato heads have labelled those going to Taksin square as Terrorists rather than freedom lovers. So the question is whether the Red line being breached by his own Islamist ally for the interventionist Dude and his 3 Graces?

I note with alarm that users 'L6QjhvJGVk' and 'femi' seem to have no idea about what they are talking about, and as a result consider America's intervention in the Korean War to be the same 'failure' as its intervention in Iraq et al.

Let's be clear. The Korean War wasn't an American intervention - it was a UN-sanctioned intervention, led by the Americans. It was successful in its objective - the defence of South Korea against the double aggressions of Communist China and North Korea. And it certainly did not kill 20% of the Korean population at the time. And frankly, I am not sure how you can consider the war to be a failure, when it clearly prevented the entire peninsula from becoming a family fiefdom for the Kims.

The Korean War was the last good war. There was a clearly defined enemy who had done something wrong (North Korean invasion of South Korea), a clearly defined objective (defence of South Korea & providing reassurance to Western Europe that America will come to their defence as well), clear state actors to support (South Korea), and a broad range of support for intervention (both in American and in the international community).

I take that you two are typical non-westerners, who seem to think that you automatically have a better idea of how non-western countries work, and have worked. Let me tell you that both of you are deeply wrong here. Just speak for your respective countries, and not for others. Republic of Korea does not like the fact that the war in which it was saved is considered a 'failure' by idiots like you.

PS. 'femi', what problem do you have with the first Gulf War as well? It saved another country from an aggressor, and delivered almost nil in casualties to the coalition forces.

"I note with alarm that users 'I note with alarm that users 'L6QjhvJGVk' and 'femi' seem to have no idea about what they are talking about, ' and 'femi' seem to have no idea about what they are talking about,(...)"

-----

Kim, that maybe true for 'femi', a Westerner of African descent who keeps talking about things he doesn't understand and often contradicts his own beliefs (Church of England, Roman Catholic wife, etc), but 'L6QjhvJGVk' knows very well what he's talking about, it's just that he is distorting everything—even history—in order to suit his biased, almost obsessively pro-People's Republic of China and, especially, anti-American and anti-Western agenda. It's shrewd, often disguised Chinese communist propaganda.

Don't underestimate him. He, who hates all religions, would use religious but naïve people like 'femi' or anyone else to suit his peculiar agenda.

"The Korean War was the last good war."

I entirely agree, which makes especially disgusting the way some people try to falsify it (see my posts below). According to some of them, on 25 June 1950 the South Korean Army, helped by US troops and other "coalition" countries (on 25 June 1950!!) invaded peace-loving North Korea, which had to be saved by the brave Chinese PLA volunteers! I mean, it's just unbelievable how some people have been indoctrinated. And how other people can believe them.

Bravo for the Republic of Korea, Daehan Minguk! Let's hope that North Korea can be liberated one day and there is ONE, democratic KOREA.

I have just seen your comments - I think that you forgot to address them to me directly.

"I note with alarm that users 'L6QjhvJGVk' and 'femi' seem to have no idea about what they are talking about" - your comment.

I know what I am talking about - I am taking a globalist view of that war and subsequent military interventions. As a South Korean, you are possibly taking a very parochial view. However, you do not have to be "alarmed" - I am a peace-loving fellow-Asian.

No you're not … you're an anti-Semite … a 'South Asian' … meaning a Pakistani … you may not be a 'believer' in Islam but you were born into Islam … you're confused by the world you inhabit … because there's a disconnect from the teachings of your belief system and reality … you look for answers in the 'logical' places which continue to pay homage to your own belief system … conspiracy theories are rampant …

Don't despair … in the end … it will all be clear … it's all been 'too much ado about nothing'!

Nothing negative would have happened if North Korea had won the war, and unified Korea.

As we have seen (in Russia, in China, in Vietnam, in Eastern Europe, in Central Asia and elsewhere) that communism over time becomes a "mixed economic model" (a bit like the Nordic countries). Intervention was entirely unnecessary. I can understand why the word "defeat" is painful for you. To put it bluntly, wars are always fought with certain objectives in mind. When those objectives are not achieved, it is an outright defeat - however, if you prefer, you can use the word "withdrawal". It happened (i.e., defeat - or withdrawal) in Korea, in Vietnam, in Iraq and currently in Afghanistan. In this process, the country which the USA did not even recognize till the 1980's, has grown from the 60th to the 2nd largest economy in the world!!!

The problem is imperial over-reach and "moral disarray". Here is what Paul Craig Roberts (he was an editor of the Wall Street Journal and an Assistant Secretary of the U.S. Treasury) has to say on this subject:

"The answer begins with President Eisenhower’s warning to the American people in his last public address about the military/industrial complex in 1962. He said that the flow of power and profit into the military/industrial complex was a threat to the economic well being and liberty of the American people. No one paid any attention, and the military/security complex was glad to be rid of the five-star general war hero president when his second term expired.

When the Soviet Union subsequently collapsed, the future outlook for the power and profit of the US military/security complex was bleak. The one percent was about to lose its fortunes and the secret government was about to lose its power. The military/security complex went to work to revive the need for a massive “defense” and “security” budget. Among their willing tools were the neoconservatives, with their Jacobin ideology and Israeli loyalties.

What kind of “superpower” is threatened by Iraq and Iran? Certainly, not a real one. As fear of nonentities swept over the population of “the world’s sole superpower,” the demands for war against “America’s enemies”–”you are with us or against us”–swept through the country. “Support the troops” plastic ribbons appeared on American cars. Americans went into a frenzy. The “towel heads” were after us, and we had to fight for our lives or be murdered in our beds, shopping centers, and airliner seats. The problem that developed with the “Muslim threat” is that in order to keep the profits and power flowing into the military/security complex, the promised six-week war in Iraq had to be extended into 8 years. The war in Afghanistan against a few thousand lightly armed Taliban has persisted for more than a decade, longer than the attempted Red Army occupation of Afghanistan.

In Iraq and Afghanistan more US soldiers have died from demoralization and suicides than from combat. In Iraq, the US was humiliated by having to end the war by putting the Sunni insurgents on the US military payroll and paying them to stop killing US troops. In Korea the US was stopped by an army of a backward third world country that lived on rice. What would happen today if the US “superpower’s” militarily confronted China, a country with an economy on which the US is dependent, about equal in size to the US economy, operating on its home territory?

China’s rise is a great boon to the US military/security complex, which governs America in which there is a pretense of “freedom and democracy.” China is the profitable replacement for the “Soviet threat.” As the days go by, the media will create in the feeble minds of Americans “The CHINA Threat.” Soon whatever little remains of the US living standard will be sacrificed to Washington’s confrontation with China, along with the seizure of our pensions and personal savings in order to deter “the China threat.”

If only Americans were an intelligent people. Then they might have some prospect of holding on to their incomes, remaining wealth, and liberty. Unfortunately, Americans are so thoroughly plugged into the Matrix that they present as a doomed people, incapable of thought, reason, or ability to comprehend the facts that the rest of the world sees clearly."

The real issue is the consistent urge to intervene, get defeated ("withdrawal") and then move on to the next imaginary threat (currently Iran and China). In the process, the economy gets weaker and the "military-industrial complex" gets richer. In the same process, American unpopularity abroad grows. The most frequently asked question I am asked is: "Why do they hate us??" The answer is nobody hates the American people (they are nice). They are constantly supplied with false facts - e.g., WMD in Iraq, nuclear weapons in Iran, cyber warfare by China, the need to defend Israel, imaginary victories, etc. The hatred (towards the USA) is entirely driven by an interventionist foreign policy.

"I have just seen your comments - I think that you forgot to address them to me directly."

--

MY comment: Apparently, he didn't forget anything, he was addressing the thread as such (initiating a comment) and referring to two users. His right.

----

"I know what I am talking about - I am taking a globalist view of that war and subsequent military interventions. As a South Korean, you are possibly taking a very parochial view."

--

MY comment: I agree, you know what you are talking about, but you keep distorting and faking history. "Globalist"? Is that the new name for "propagandist" in this new version of 'Newspeak'?
"Parochial"? That's the pot calling the kettle black, and there is an ideological parochialism as well.

--

"However, you do not have to be "alarmed" - I am a peace-loving fellow-Asian."

MY comment: I wonder why you keep reminding me of George Orwell, '1984', 'Animal Farm'... And, if I were this Korean fellow, I would be alarmed.

---

NB. Disclaimer, just in case you... : By no means am I speaking on Kim77's 'behalf', of course. I couldn't do that even if I wanted to and I certainly don't. This is an open thread on an open blog on an open Internet forum which is part of The Economist, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, a part of the Free World. One of the United Nations countries that fought against the North Korean and Red Chinese aggressors in the Korean War. 1,078 servicemen were killed and 2,692 were wounded—iincluding other Commonwealth countries—in action doing defending their own countries, South Korea, international legality and the Free World:

BRITISH FORCES

29th British Inf. Brigade

(including Commonwealth countries)

British Commonwealth Forces in Korea Commonwealth troops serving in Korea included British, Canadian, Australian, New Zealander, and South African contingents.

The first British units to arrive at Pusan on 28 August 1950 were the 1st Battalion The Middlesex Regiment and 1st Battalion The Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders under the 27th British Infantry Brigade. They were soon joined by the 3d Battalion Royal Australian Regiment from Japan where it was conducting occupation duty. They initially served under the US 24th Infantry Division. It was redesignated the 27th Commonwealth Infantry Brigade in October when Australian and Canadian units were assigned, which served under the US 1st Cavalry Division. The 29th British Infantry Brigade Group arrived in September 1950, followed by the 28th Commonwealth Brigade Group in April 1951, which replaced the 27th, and then the 25th Canadian Infantry Brigade Group. In July these units were organized into the 1st Commonwealth Division. The Division, while under US/UN operational control, was administered by Commander-in-Chief, Commonwealth Forces headquartered in Japan. At the war*s end 14,200 Commonwealth troops were serving in Korea. A total of 26,791 Canadians and 17,164 Australian troops served in Korea. The last British troops departed Korea in July 1957.

Nothing negative would have happened if North Korea had won the war, and unified Korea.

As we have seen (in Russia, in China, in Vietnam, in Eastern Europe, in Central Asia and elsewhere) that communism over time becomes a "mixed economic model" (a bit like the Nordic countries). Intervention was entirely unnecessary. I can understand why the word "defeat" is painful for you. To put it bluntly, wars are always fought with certain objectives in mind. When those objectives are not achieved, it is an outright defeat - however, if you prefer, you can use the word "withdrawal". It happened (i.e., defeat - or withdrawal) in Korea, in Vietnam, in Iraq and currently in Afghanistan. In this process, the country which the USA did not even recognize till the 1980's, has grown from the 60th to the 2nd largest economy in the world!!!

The problem is imperial over-reach and "moral disarray". Here is what Paul Craig Roberts (he was an editor of the Wall Street Journal and an Assistant Secretary of the U.S. Treasury) has to say on this subject:

"The answer begins with President Eisenhower’s warning to the American people in his last public address about the military/industrial complex in 1962. He said that the flow of power and profit into the military/industrial complex was a threat to the economic well being and liberty of the American people. No one paid any attention, and the military/security complex was glad to be rid of the five-star general war hero president when his second term expired.

When the Soviet Union subsequently collapsed, the future outlook for the power and profit of the US military/security complex was bleak. The one percent was about to lose its fortunes and the secret government was about to lose its power. The military/security complex went to work to revive the need for a massive “defense” and “security” budget. Among their willing tools were the neoconservatives, with their Jacobin ideology and Israeli loyalties.

What kind of “superpower” is threatened by Iraq and Iran? Certainly, not a real one. As fear of nonentities swept over the population of “the world’s sole superpower,” the demands for war against “America’s enemies”–”you are with us or against us”–swept through the country. “Support the troops” plastic ribbons appeared on American cars. Americans went into a frenzy. The “towel heads” were after us, and we had to fight for our lives or be murdered in our beds, shopping centers, and airliner seats. The problem that developed with the “Muslim threat” is that in order to keep the profits and power flowing into the military/security complex, the promised six-week war in Iraq had to be extended into 8 years. The war in Afghanistan against a few thousand lightly armed Taliban has persisted for more than a decade, longer than the attempted Red Army occupation of Afghanistan.

In Iraq and Afghanistan more US soldiers have died from demoralization and suicides than from combat. In Iraq, the US was humiliated by having to end the war by putting the Sunni insurgents on the US military payroll and paying them to stop killing US troops. In Korea the US was stopped by an army of a backward third world country that lived on rice. What would happen today if the US “superpower’s” militarily confronted China, a country with an economy on which the US is dependent, about equal in size to the US economy, operating on its home territory?

China’s rise is a great boon to the US military/security complex, which governs America in which there is a pretense of “freedom and democracy.” China is the profitable replacement for the “Soviet threat.” As the days go by, the media will create in the feeble minds of Americans “The CHINA Threat.” Soon whatever little remains of the US living standard will be sacrificed to Washington’s confrontation with China, along with the seizure of our pensions and personal savings in order to deter “the China threat.”

If only Americans were an intelligent people. Then they might have some prospect of holding on to their incomes, remaining wealth, and liberty. Unfortunately, Americans are so thoroughly plugged into the Matrix that they present as a doomed people, incapable of thought, reason, or ability to comprehend the facts that the rest of the world sees clearly."

The real issue is the consistent urge to intervene, get defeated ("withdrawal") and then move on to the next imaginary threat (currently Iran and China). In the process, the economy gets weaker and the "military-industrial complex" gets richer. In the same process, American unpopularity abroad grows. The most frequently asked question I am asked is: "Why do they hate us??" The answer is nobody hates the American people (they are nice). They are constantly supplied with false facts - e.g., WMD in Iraq, nuclear weapons in Iran, cyber warfare by China, the need to defend Israel, imaginary victories, etc. The hatred (towards the USA) is entirely driven by an interventionist foreign policy.

Your citing British casualties is interesting, but effectively a cruel joke - they were combatants. The "allies" killed over 6 million people of whom 4 million were women and children.

From the archives of the Bertrand Russell commission on war crimes:

Mass indiscriminate killing of civilians was the doctrine of the war and not an aberration. U.S. Air Force General Curtis LeMay boasted that U.S. planes had “burned down every town in North Korea” and killed 20 percent of the population of Korea as direct casualties of war or from starvation and exposure!!!!

U.S. armed forces used more bombs and artillery shells in Korea than in all of World War 2, and used napalm against military and civilian targets. An estimated 6 million people were killed in the war, 4 million of them civilians, a huge human cost out of a total population of 30 million in North and South Korea at that time!!!!"

From “Rethinking The Nogun-ri Massacre on the 50th Anniversary of the Outbreak of the Korean War,” by Sung Yong Park, a minister of the Korean Methodist Church and a Representative of Philadelphia Branch of the Congress for Korean Reunification:

One such U.S. massacre occurred on July 26, 1950, in and near the village of No Gun Ri [also spelled Nogun-ri], where hundreds of civilians, mainly women and children, were killed.

The U.S. commander told his troops that all civilians seen in the area “are to be considered as enemy and action taken accordingly.” One witness said that Capt. Melbourne Chandler said to his soldiers in No Gun Ri, “the hell with all these people. Let’s get rid of all of them.”

Some soldiers reportedly refused to shoot at those one described as “civilians just trying to hide.”

Eun-yong Chung, a representative of the Nogun-ri Victims’ Organization, related what happened during the incident: “We were ordered by U.S. army, ‘Everybody, come together! We will escort you to the safe place.’ Following the order, we, local villagers, walked the road in the dark night, leading ox-carts, with children on our backs. About noon of next day, July 26, when our refugees’ march arrived at Nogun-ri area, 5-6 GIs blocked our way. They brought all the people and ox-carts onto parallel railroad tracks. After fully investigating all of us, they spoke to someone by radio. We Korean refugees didn’t know why. There we took a rest for a while.

“About that time, two U.S. airplanes flew over us. At that moment the GIs disappeared, something black fell down on us and exploded among the refugees. It was like a storm, with clouds of dust and pieces of rock bursting into the sky. The bloody pieces of bodies and oxen were all around. The rest of people alive ran into the tunnel under the railroad trestle [Editors’ note: U.S. air attack caused 100 dead before a shot was fired at the bridge.

“GIs [of H Company of the 2nd Battalion, 7th U.S. Cavalry Regiment] aggressively pushed the rest of the scattered refugees into the tunnel. The refugees felt they were suffocating because of compacted mass of people within two narrow tunnels. Since one woman couldn’t endure the suffocation, she came out of the tunnel. On that spot she got shot and fell down. From the opposite side of the tunnel, firing began. GIs set up machine guns on both sides of entrance and fired on us.

“As the time passed, dead bodies were piled up in both entrances and the stream of blood abounded within the tunnel. In such way massacre continued for four days. When NKPA arrived there, they said, ‘the U.S. Army is gone! Any person alive can return to your home now!’ But, the cold corpses were silent.”

As I said earlier - the war started on the 38th parallel and ended on the 38th parallel - not a single inch of territory was "won" - yet over 6 million people died.

Look L6QjhvJGVkin, I am not going to waste my time with your overlong, consecutive comments, and I am not going to take you seriously any more, I lost the human and intellectual respect I had for you, especially after I got this from you a few minutes ago:

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&

6QjhvJGVk in reply to Accrux 1 hour 30 mins ago

Afghanistan was lost a few hours ago.

Breaking news: reported in the British press 1 hour ago - the Afghanistan war has also been lost.

Here is what the Guardian wrote (1 hour ago):

"The US will begin direct peace talks with Taliban leaders over the future of Afghanistan within days, it was revealed on Tuesday, after Washington agreed to drop a series of preconditions that have previously held back negotiations.

In a major milestone in the 12-year-old war, political representatives of Mullah Omar will shortly meet US officials in Doha, Qatar, to discuss an agenda for what US officials called "peace and reconciliation" before further talks take place with Afghan government representatives soon after.

Barack Obama is understood to have informed G8 leaders of the breakthrough at a dinner at the Northern Ireland summit on Monday night.

The deal on talks with the Taliban was partly brokered by Pakistan and the emir of Qatar after "months of diplomatic spadework" also involving Germany, Norway and the UK.

Barack Obama is understood to have informed G8 leaders of the breakthrough at a dinner at the Northern Ireland summit on Monday night."

They are now talking "peace" officially with the Taliban (who were supposed to have been "destroyed" in the Afghan war) and their leader, Mullah Omar. You will recall that Mullah Omar is a guy with 1 eye. At the beginning of the Afghan war he was pursued by 6 Apache helicopter gunships shooting rockets at him. He (with 1 eye) managed to escape from this "shock and awe" scene on a borrowed motorcycle. Lol.

How the mighty have fallen!!!!

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&

My flabbergasted reply:

Accrux in reply to L6QjhvJGVk 49 mins ago

L6QjhvJGVk, really, do you want me to think that you are unbalanced? So what? I have never discussed Afghanistan with you, I don't give a FIG about Afghanistan, what I keep telling you—after reading some of your repetitive posts, a boring tautology—is that you are distorting and falsifying the Korean War, 1950-53, and I happen to know this war very well, and not only because I have read quite a few books about it.

You keep resorting to diversions. You digress and go off topic. What a lack of intellectual rigour and intellectual honesty.

This last post of yours, when you haven't even replied to those in which I debunked some of your assertions, is very, very telling.

And this exultant reaction of yours gives yourself away. More than you can imagine.

Enjoy yourself, but please don't flood me with your
posts, four or five in about an hour is too much. Besides, I don't live for this and I don't defend a fanatical 'cause', for or against, as you do. Fortunately for me.

They taught you well in that People's school, academy, university or wherever you were, I have to admit that. But I doubt you will ever really convince any well-educated, cultured, intelligent and mature inhabitant of the Western world. Try elsewhere, where some poor people need to be guided and 'enlightened'

"They taught you well in that People's school, academy, university or wherever you were, I have to admit that. But I doubt you will ever really convince any well-educated, cultured, intelligent and mature inhabitant of the Western world" - your comment.

This is last response to you - just to correct your facts and perceptions.

I was educated at the London School of Economics, Kings College and and the Australian National University.

On the Korean war, I am sure that you know a lot in terms of the details. However, I was merely giving you an interpretation that is different from what you may have read. This is causing "cognitive dissonance" - which is quite common when you look at history from a revisionist perspective with a clinical examination of results achieved, and the cost of achieving those results.

I wrote "They taught you well in that People's school, academy, university or wherever you were", I assume you know what commas are, so I included a university (the "Australian National University", in this case), so where's the problem? By the way, it's King's College...

Well, considering your (lack of) objectivity and (lack of) intellectual rigour and honesty, plus your exhausting, overlong, tautological and consecutive comments, all I can say is... what a waste. Your education, I mean. Especially when you seem to despise a large part of that culture and that civilization. The Western world always so generous, even with its real or potential enemies. Anyway, the simple fact that you can like, admire and justify two of the most totalitarian and murderous political regimes in history leaves me flabbergasted. An American friend of mine would say that you are just a "commie", but I don't like that word. What about crypto-communist? Just asking. Or is just the Asian, racial part?

You don't know what I have read about the Korean War and I am not going to give you now a detailed bibliography (from Toland to [Gen. Mathhew B] Ridgway, from Paik Sun-yup to Associated Press, from Books in French to books in Spanish, including leftist ones, etc). I never read a North Korean or Red Chinese book about this, nor do I really want to, but I read articles and excerpts, which are totally biased and jingoistic. Crap.

Thank you for your diagnosis ("cognitive dissonance"), I prefer not to tell you what mine is, for it would include cognitive bias but also other things perhaps you would not like).

It's very simple: you don't have any academic—I don't need to give you a list of the places where I have studied—or human superiority over me, and I don't accept you as a guide or mentor, especially after what I have seen of you, so don't bother to 'advise' me.

Here, enjoy this (Alas, in mainland China they can't watch it: YouTube and so many other things are forbidden there, a paradise of the people and for the people). But if you live in a free country you will enjoy it. Because I know you will (even I like it... as a 'cartoon' or a Busby Berkeley musical!)

How can you possibly like and defend two countries that killed millions and millions of their own 'citizens', plus other people, which censors almost everything and does not respect freedom of expression? A governnent so ridiculously paranoid that it censored even Winnie the Pooh a few days ago?

Get Serious, Syria is a reflection of the Muslim mentality, best left to its own evolution.
The choice is between

is Constructive Coexistence in the here and now of terrestrial life or Perennial lethal squabbling over intangible belief systems.
Show me proof of a Lutheran Latrine or an Islamic ion, a Jewish joule or a Moslem Megabyte or a Catholic Catheter Then we can talk about Islamic Fundamentalists in Nigeria,Syria,Malaysia, or any other iria or Area.

Otherwise I remain astounded by an unfinished product of animal evolution.whose social sapience remains close to absolute ignorance.
Haminlima

any socio-political and economic condition in areas like the middle east and north africa always have to be ALWAYS put into unbiased broad historical context. in consideration to all the foreign interests, geographical location, etc.

after such analysis, your proposition of bloodshed being the cause of "muslim mentality" becomes an absolutely less significant contributor to the crisis.

The fundamentalists of all stripes and kindred can all agree that the outside interventions and perpetual conflicts among themselves in the Levant will lead to the Rise of Anti-Christ King of the West to lead the Abrahamic world into Armageddon death as a pre-condition for the return of the Messiah.

ALAS YOU DID NOT UNDERSTAND MY "CONVOLUTED wRITING"
Try rereading it with another English speaking person.
MY CLEAR PROSE referred to homo sapiens, including you and me as "an unfinished product of evolution.

I'd like your comment on CONSTRUCTIVE COEXISTENCE AS A SOCIOPOLITICAL IDEAL.among members of our species.ahmencher@gmail.com

The Cold War Part II. Syria is a pawn. US should be in containment mode against Iran and Russia. Leveraging mistrust of Shia's, US could expand support via Jordan, Turkey, Egypt, and the Gulf states. Jordan is most likely not excited about Hezbollah forces on its door steps and Israel can be depended on to stop arms movements beyond the Syrian border. A no fly zone would include shutting the ports to Russian arms. The ultimate goal is to limit/stop the expansion of Iran and continue to press Russia; which is declining in power with time against them. The wild card is Turkey and Israel.

The relatively "clean" solution to this problem and other such insurrections which can occur in the future is the one provided by history. The British Foreign Office was particularly successful at armed interventions and its central concept was this:
You have to make the intervention pay for itself. In other words colonization. Only then will people who have the wherewithal to intervene do so. And a full scale ground invasion is the only measure which has a chance of preventing further massacres.
If it had that bent of mind, in return for a full scale ground invasion, the United States would install a Governor General in Syria for ~10 years, impose a flat "rescue" tax on the Syrians and extract significant oil concessions for its efforts. For America to sustainably keep acting as the world's policeman/hegemon and increase its influence it has to stop spending on its wars and let them pay for themselves.
But the present generation of American voters lacks the appetite for imperial adventure and so fortunately or unfortunately (depending on your point of view) the American government does not have this option on the table.
If this had been 1913 instead of 2013, Syria would have been regarded as a great opportunity in diplomatic circles.

"If this had been 1913 instead of 2013, Syria would have been regarded as a great opportunity in diplomatic circles."

------

I agree, and considering that the Ottoman Empire had just been defeated by Italy and then by the Balkan countries, I bet that HMS Inflexible, HMS Indomitable, HMS Indefatigable and a few destroyers would be now at anchor in Tartus, while SMS Goeben and SMS Breslau were off Latakia...

Nice reference to those ships. Whether they would have been at Latakia or not at that time, they still ended up in Istanbul a mere year later. Not one of Churchill's best decisions; and then came Gallipoli...

Yes. Sorry, I forgot to mention USS South Carolina off Baniyas, just in case... (on January 28, 1914, she was in Port-au-Prince, Haiti, where her Marine detachment landed and joined British, German and French detachments ashore, so... why not?)

Notice that I placed the Americans between the British and the Germans... Alfred T. Mahan, shortly before he died, would have liked that, I suppose!
Besides, I believe he was the first to use the term "Middle East", so...

Mahan is greatly under-appreciated among his counry(wo)men today, save the military - especially naval - kind of people. He was one of the great naval thinkers of the modern era. Don't know about him being the first to use the term "Middle East", but wouldn't be surprised at all. He was one of the very few Americans in his days who understood the world, and America's role in it, far better than most professional politicians or diplomats.

I belideve that,historically, the nation statesthat only tried to get material benefits for themselves by taking them from other nation states wer far mor successful or great failures in retaining their own cultural identities. <<<<<<<<<<<<

The 3 Graces of Intervention are certainly no fools. In fact just like the ICJ in the Hague blasted by Africans in the recent AU summit, they are the new Model of Imperialism to the developing world particularly in the Ummah.

The red line having been crossed pres. Obama had no choice. The massive presence of Hezbollah terrorists in Syria they've move into on orders of their master, Islamist Iran, and Russia's continuing arming of homicidal Assad Shia (Alawite) regime is unacceptable to most Arab countries, as well as Turkey.

Jordan has requested that American F-16s and Patriot anti-aircraft missiles remain deployed in its vulnerable territory and Washington has acquiesced. Ditto for Turkey.

Btw. Iranian voters don't want a confrontation with US (highly popular among its young) and think ayatollahs's support for Hezbollah terrorists is detrimental to Iran's improvement of relations with the West.

Since the Christian Zionists and AIPAC were both pushing, WMD have (predictably appeared). The same happened in Iraq.
Another unnecessary war, followed by a defeat - the word in Washington is "withdrawal".

Here is Richie Havens on this subject:

"Ive been waiting for something to happen
For a week or a month or a year
With the blood in the ink of the headlines
And the sound of the crowd in my ear
You might ask what it takes to remember
When you know that you've seen it before
Where a government lies to a people
And a country is drifting to war

And there is a shadow on the faces
Of the men who send the guns
To the wars that are fought in places
Where their business interest runs

On the radio talk shows and the t.v.
You hear one thing again and again
How the USA stands for freedom
And we come to the aid of a friend
But who are the ones that we call our friends--
These governments killing their own?
Or the people who finally can't take any more
And they pick up a gun or a brick or a stone
There are lives in the balance
There are people under fire
There are children at the cannons
And there is blood on the wire

There's a shadow on the faces
Of the men who fan the flames
Of the wars that are fought in places
Where we can't even say the names

They sell us the president the same way
They sell us our clothes and our cars
They sell us every thing from youth to religion
The same time they sell us our wars
I want to know who the men in the shadows are
I want to hear somebody asking them why
They can be counted on to tell us who our enemies are
But they're never the ones to fight or to die
And there are lives in the balance
There are people under fire
There are children at the cannons
And there is blood on the wire."

Why is it so difficult for anti-semites to admit they are antisemitic -nobody would send them to death camps for that - that they have to use the term "Zionist" and "Zionist entity" as their spiritual leader Ahmadinejad and his boss:
Gran Ayatollah Al Khamanei?

The USA is allied to ruthless tyrants who are promoting a sectarian bloodbath in Syria which is very unpopular with young people everywhere, including the youth of Iran. The Syrian army is strong, we shall see how it ends.

Every time we always propose that solving Syrian's civial war is through dialogue and negotiation.However , I just woder if American interfere in Syrian'affair, which just make this condition deteriorate and it is not a wise choice to make for American. As is known to all, Syrian's fate is in the hand of their people.Thank you!

Obama's proof for the use of chemical weapons is very weak. And when he made the red line statement he clearly meant more than some small scale use of chemical weapons. But even if you don't want to take that into account, he is the leader of the mightiest country in the world. He is supposed to act because of some strategy not out of fear that some war mongers might call him "weak" when he doesn't do what they want.

BTW … Richie Havens didn't write the song … the songwriter is Jackson Browne who is white! I've seen them both and Richie I saw last just before he died this year in a small club in Toronto called Hughs Room!

As for the lyrics … Jackson Browne is a 'lefty/liberal' type a guy … I loved him in the 1970's but … not much after that!

The 'hoary' subject of WMD's for Iraq is simply overkill … Hussein was available for a takedown … he needed to be gone … how do you think he'd have faired in the 'Arab Spring'? Would he have been more or less ruthless than Assad? Certainly he would have killed Shias at an unprecedented rate and would not have allowed munitions to pass through Iraq to Syria … but what else?

If Sadaam was still in charge of Iraq … would the Arab Spring have SPRUNG? Maybe the USA's intervention … showing the way forward AWAY FROM dictators to a more open liberal democratic way … CAUSED the whole Arab Awakening thing …

BUT YOU wanna blame Christian Zionists and AIPAC? Where are you this week? If you're coming to Toronto I'll have a posse meet you at the airport. Let me know your flight number …

"The red line having been crossed pres. Obama had no choice" - your comments.

Beware of false flag operations by others - like what happened in Iraq. Here is a news analysis about false flag operations by America's "ally":

"Back in 2006 a story made its rounds through the internet and the worlds media that Israel snipers were killing U.S. Troops in Iraq and pinning the blame on “insurgents” in order to enrage American troops so that the slaughter continued. After a thorough investigation into this older story there is more than enough evidence to point to the fact that Mossad is operating inside Iraq and has been for years. On October 18, 2006 Anderson Cooper of CNN showed a video of snipers killing U.S. troops in Iraq. CNN says it obtained the video from a “representative” of an unnamed “insurgent leader.” Bear in mind that Anderson Cooper used to work for the CIA. Interesting side note, If you go to Anderson Coopers “blog” and look at Anderson Cooper’s Archives you will see that there is a huge missing gap of video from December 2005 – January 2008. That is two years of missing video reports. Interesting that it happens to be the same time this report aired and the same time that the sectarian violence in Iraq was raging and attacks by “insurgents” on our troops increased in number and brutality.

Richard Wilson’s hypothesis: Israeli soldiers and/or Mossad agents are killing our soldiers in Iraq in order to enrage American troops so that the slaughter continues.

At the very beginning of the original (now missing) video clip, you see a rifle with a video camera attached to it. This weapon is made by the Rafael company, an Israeli arms manufacturer, that also makes IEDs. As you watch the video, you see that with each shot fired, the camera recoils. Why is this significant? Because this kind of rifle-camera is extremely sophisticated and not available to your average Iraqi insurgent. Something this sophisticated points to Mossad.

For example, on July 23, 2005, a detachment of 19 female US Marines was sent to Fallujah to check Iraqi women for bombs. An IED blew up their truck. Two of the young American women were killed, five were critically wounded, and four were captured. The bodies of the four captured women turned up later in a garbage dump with their throats cut. Americans were outraged. Islamic clerics insisted that only Israelis could be so cold-blooded. And who was in charge of US forces in Fallujah at the time? None other than Major General Natonski, the Mossad liaison.

Americans are supposed to believe that rag-tag “insurgents” use IEDs powerful enough to kill three US troops per day, on average and flip over up-armored vehicles. An American soldier even set up a blog on how “Intel” is betraying and targeting US troops. The blog has long since been taken down, one can only assume by the Pentagon.

According to Richard Wilson, Israeli sniping and IEDs are false flag operations. He says that on March 28, 2005, Americans arrested Mossad agents who fired twice on a US Marine checkpoint. And indeed in 2005 U.S. Marines arrested 16 members of the Zapata Engineering Security Convoy for firing on Marine guard towers. The Marines beat up the Mossad agents and tore off their Star-of-David necklaces. The Mossad agents said they were employees of Zapata Engineering, which is a CIA/Mossad front company that conducts interrogations, and also manages US ammo dumps and US motor pools in Iraq.

IEDs in Iraq are powerful enough to flip over a 70-ton tank. Some of the models shoot depleted-uranium projectiles, and are triggered by electronic devices surreptitiously planted on US armored vehicles. Zapata Engineering (which employs Mossad agents) makes this exact kind of trigger, and oversees some of the US motor pools.

Rumsfeld said the IEDs come from Iran, but Richard said they come from The Mossad, and are not “improvised” at all. The Israeli company, Rafael, makes IEDS, which are buried in the middle of a road. On the side of the road is a device which emits a laser or radio signal. This device is manufactured by firms like Zapata Engineering, which is controlled by Mossad. The IED mine, manufactured by Israel, is inert until a US vehicle (secretly planted with a triggering device) rolls over it."

Expect more Mossad false flag operations in the coming weeks. And do not be surprised if suddenly (perhaps by next week) there are "confessions" from "rebel soldiers" that "chemical weapons" are being provided by Iran!!!!!

And then there will be headlines about more red lines being crossed, etc.................

Breaking news: my the news 1 hour ago - the Afghanistan war has also been lost.
Here is what the Guardian wrote (1 hour ago):
"The US will begin direct peace talks with Taliban leaders over the future of Afghanistan within days, it was revealed on Tuesday, after Washington agreed to drop a series of preconditions that have previously held back negotiations.
In a major milestone in the 12-year-old war, political representatives of Mullah Omar will shortly meet US officials in Doha, Qatar, to discuss an agenda for what US officials called "peace and reconciliation" before further talks take place with Afghan government representatives soon after.
Barack Obama is understood to have informed G8 leaders of the breakthrough at a dinner at the Northern Ireland summit on Monday night.
The deal on talks with the Taliban was partly brokered by Pakistan and the emir of Qatar after "months of diplomatic spadework" also involving Germany, Norway and the UK.
Barack Obama is understood to have informed G8 leaders of the breakthrough at a dinner at the Northern Ireland summit on Monday night."
They are now talking "peace" officially with the Taliban (who were supposed to have been "destroyed" in the Afghan war) and their leader, Mullah Omar. You will recall that Mullah Omar is a guy with 1 eye. At the beginning of the Afghan war he was pursued by 6 Apache helicopter gunships shooting rockets at him. He (with 1 eye) managed to escape from this "shock and awe" scene on a borrowed motorcycle. Lol.
How the mighty have fallen!!!!

Let us be clear about the English language with reference to wars. When countries are "win a war" they accept "terms of surrender" and "capture" the "enemy's top brass"- e.g., Japan in 1945, Germany's leaders in 1945. Conversely, when countries "lose a war" they "open peace talks" with the "enemy's top brass" and discuss "withdrawal" - e.g., the American "withdrawal" from Vietnam, the Korean "peace talks", and now the US "peace talks" with the Taliban's top brass and "withdrawal" from Afghanistan.

The talks begin in Doha tomorrow morning - there are no pre-conditions.